SUDHDEO JHA UTPAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave against the revisional judgment of the High Court of Patna, by which the conviction of the appellant of offences under Ss. 420 and 193, Penal Code had been confirmed and a sentence of two years' rigorous imprisonment passed on him under S. 120-B, read with S. 420, Penal Code, by the trial Court and confirmed in appeal, had been transposed for the offence under S. 420, Penal Code. The sentence under S. 193, Penal Code was also confirmed but was directed to run concurrently with the other sentence. The circumstances relating to the above appeal may be shortly stated as follows : -

(2.) The Express Auto Service, Ltd., is a private Limited Company, arming a large number of motor buses and trucks, plying between the important towns of the State of Bihar, with its Headquarters at Dumka. The appellant, as the General Manager of the Company, is alleged to have entered into a conspiracy with the Director and Manager for the purpose of cheating the Government by procuring petrol coupons during the years 1947-1948, when petrol rationing was in operation in the State of Bihar. The modus operandi attributed to the accused persons was that in the application for coupons for petrol a number of trucks and buses which were not in a road-worthy condition and for which taxes had not been paid, were included as being a running condition and on that misrepresentation the rationing authorities were induced to part with petrol coupons which they would not have done if they were apprised of the real state of circumstances. So far as the present appeal is concerned, the charge is restricted to nine vehicles which were not in existence or not in a road-worthy condition at the time the applications (Exs. P. 15 and 16) had been filed by the appellant. Four out of these buses, mentioned in Ex. 15, namely, B.R.J. 307, B.R.L.554, B.R.L, 581 and 560, and five trucks out of those mentioned in Ex. 16, namely, B.R.J. 475, B.R.J. 476, B.R.L. 535, B.R.L 547 and B.R.L 550 wore either not in existence, or not in a road-worthy condition at the time Exs. P. 15 and 16 were filed on 5-2-1948 before the petrol rationing authority. In column No. 3 of Exs, 15 and 16 it has been stated that the tax due on these vehicles had been paid up to 31-3-1948. On the strength of the certificate contained in them, namely, that the contents of the applications were correct and that no other application for ordinary coupons in respect of the vehicles mentioned underneath as State carriages, had been made, the petrol rationing authority directed the issue of specific quantity of units of petrol by issuing the requisite coupons. Though there was some dispute as regards the non-existence of the nine vehicles above mentioned, during the course of the appeal before the High Court, it was no longer challenged that the statements in Exs. 15 and 16 to the effect that the tax had been paid in respect of these nine vehicles were wrong and also that the, implied assertion with respect to the three of these vehicles namely B.R.L 547, B.R.L 550, and B.R.J. 554, that they were in a road-worthy condition, was also wrong. The trial Court and the Court of appeal which were the ultimate Courts of fact, came to adverse findings against the appellant on those points and the name was not upset by the High Court in revision. We, therefore, take it that the statements in Exs. 15 and 16 to the effect that the tax in respect of these vehicles had been paid and that three at least of them were in a road-worthy condition, are false representations.

(3.) What was argued before the High Court was that the appellant being the General Manager signed Exs. 15 and 16 which were not, in fact, filled in by him or on his directions following the usual practice of depending upon the office staff who made the necessary entries and put the documents before him for signatures. It is alleged that the company being a fairly big one, paying about Rs. 40,000 as tax with respect to the vehicles, the General Manager could not be expected to know the accurate details of what had happened but would have to depend upon his office staff for the correctness of the statements contained in the applications. In short, the contention that has been put forward is that the appellant consciously did not make a false representation but in accordance with the practice obtaining in his office signed the documents placed before him by the subordinate staff as a matter of routine. In such circumstances it is argued that no culpability should be attached to the action of the appellant because he has not done anything with a criminal intent. It is not shown that he acted fraudulently or dishonestly as defined in Ss. 24 and 25, Penal Code.